Proof that the Xbox 360 is not Xbox 1.5

[Acert93]

Proof that the Xbox 360 is the Xbox 1.5 is false!

Ok, I have not proven anything yet either way--but I got you to read As a survivor of the E3 threads and the 360 launch (ok, I cheated on the later because I was not here) I would like to bring up an interesting idea: Comparing launch titles from the PS2/Xbox with Xbox 360 launch titles. Why? Because I believe they give the best indicator of how much the hardware has progressed--especially if we compare the first next gen console in each gen where possible (the reason being that a console shipped a year later has the benefit of developers already spending a year on next-gen quality development).

Below I have tried to compare some representative games and game shots -- I right now confess failure at such, but I did the best I could. I tried to narrow each down as much as possible: Launch titles, Genre, Developer, Franchise/Series. Sometimes I had to just go by genre, and in some cases some of the games are 2 or 3 years after the launch (and sometimes on the Xbox1 and not PS2 when comparing some Xbox franchises) but overall I think I got some decent comparisons. **Note that some of the best PS2 launch games are not mentioned because there is nothing really comparable/representative in the Xbox library.** Anyhow, knowing that this is not scientific, I think it does show how graphically the 360 is more than a meager upgrade (whether KK ment it that way or in terms of the platform and growth/features I will leave to others to debate) and that developer to developer and genre to genre we are seeing a pretty big jump--bigger than I personally expected. So far devs, imo, have made launch software that is comparable to the N64=>PS2/Xbox jump.

And on to the examples...

Boxing (KotR 2001 vs FNR3
Old:
Front shot =>
Punch =>

New:
Front Shot =>
Punch =>

(Uh yeah, not gonna even do any more of these because it is a first round TKO)

Ghost Recon
Old:
Aiming from behind =>
Firing =>
Behind vehicle =>
Jungle =>

New:
Aiming from behind =>
Firing (MP) =>
Behind vehicle =>
Junkle (MP) =>

Ridge Racer
Old:
Side =>
Behind car =>

New:
Side =>
Behind car =>

NBA Live
Old:
Dunk =>
Face =>

New:
Dunk =>
Face =>

Madden
Old:
Ray Lewis =>
Snow =>
Close Up =>
Stadium =>
Taunt =>

New:
Ray Lewis =>
Snow =>
Close Up =>
Stadium =>
Taunt =>

PGR3
Old:
Cars from Front angle =>
Oncoming Cars =>
Rear Car =>
Tires & Background =>

New:
Cars from Front angle =>
Oncoming Cars =>
Rear Car =>
Tires & Background =>

CoD (CoD2 and CoD: Finest Hour (PS2 2004) and MoH: Frontline (PS2 2002))
Old CoD:
Guy, Tank, Smoke =>
Guys =>
Big Gun =>

Old MoH:
Smoke =>
Guys =>
Bunker =>

New:
Guy, Tank, Smoke =>
Guys =>
Big Gun =>

DoA (Ignore motion blur)
Old:
Cage/Ring => Juggle =>
New:
Cage/Ring => Cage/Ring2 =>
Juggle =>

Kameo & Crash
Old:
Monster =>
Narrow Pass =>
Fight =>
Big Enemy =>

New:
Monster =>
Narrow Pass =>
Fight =>
Big Enemy 1 =>
Big Enemy 2 =>

My Conclusion: Definately Xbox 1.5 The Xbox 360 launch software is a really huge step above and beyond the PS2/Xbox launch titles. Just looking at Fight Night Round 3 compared to King of the Fighters 2001 really just stands out how much the new hardware has advanced and what it has ment to games.

On a sober tone, I think this bodes well for all of us. It is pretty clear that in regards to launch titles the 360 software is showing significant advancement over the last gen launch titles. Even a very dissappointing title like Madden 360 is way and above the PS2 Madden--which was IMO the PS2 killer app and everyone I know was bragging on how lifelike it looked. As developers begin learning the ins and outs of next gen development & begin catering engines to the new consoles (and then building art assets for these specific engine specs and features) I think we should be in for a treat.

Just my opinion of course. If you don't like it I wont be around long enough to argue it (Ps- no, I don't have a 360, still waiting on the PS3 and seeing if they have better monitor support [no letterbox 720p for 1280x1024 PC monitors!] and KB/MS support in game... and of course the games. Live rocks though.)

 

[nintenho]

The best way to respond to this is to simply say that there is a very profound difference between being myopic and being sardonic. I'm guessing you need help seeing this difference though...........

 

[one]

I would like to bring up an interesting idea: Comparing launch titles from the PS2/Xbox with Xbox 360 launch titles. Why? Because I believe they give the best indicator of how much the hardware has progressed--especially if we compare the first next gen console in each gen where possible

Only hardcore people remember how games looked like 5 years ago. To argue against "Xbox 1.5" which is supposed to be a public notion of today, you should look at how games look today on PS2/Xbox. I think it's more interesting to compare the difference between PS2 launch titles and late PS1 titles with the difference between Xbox 360 launch titles and late Xbox 1 titles.

 

[Acert93]

Only hardcore people remember how games looked like 5 years ago. To argue against "Xbox 1.5" which is supposed to be a public notion of today

What public notion? It was a Sony PR smear campaign relating to the Xbox 360 hardware/platform vision. All I tried to do, objectively as possible, was compare software developed in similar situations. Gen transition, launch titles, franchise, developer, genre, similar screen shot.

The greater the similarity is between the variables the more we can glean. Comparing apples-to-oranges (like 5th year software to a ported launch title) skews what we are looking at because the issue is no longer the system but the state of the industry. We can talk about the state of the industry, but that does not tell us much about whether the 360 is the Xbox 1.5 or the Xbox 2, which of course is the point of my thread.

you should look at how games look today on PS2/Xbox.

If we are trying to assess the hardware then I think that is a misleading comparison (not that the results are much different in many cases). Comparing (a) the first consoles out and (b) launch software gives us a much better grasp of what developers are capable of doing with the hardware from day 1. Further limiting it to similar game shots in the same franchises made by the same people tells us a lot about how the hardware has impacted the game.

Comparing rushed launch software that had months with real hardware to software that has game engines and techniques that have evolved over 4-6 years is not comparing the hardware but is instead comparing developers. And the last time I checked the Xbox 1.5 comment was directed at the hardware.

I think it's more interesting to compare the difference between PS2 launch titles and late PS1 titles with the difference between Xbox 360 launch titles and late Xbox 1 titles.

You are welcome to do that (there are a number of games to compare like Madden, CoD, GRAW, FNR3, etc if you wish to keep as many variables as possible to a minimum) but that says less about "Xbox 1.5" and more about the state of affairs in software development/publishing and the heavy reliance on porting. If you want to show some pictures that would be a very interesting thread worth reading :smile: But I warn you, have fun finding similar looking picks of games of the same franchise/developer/genre... pretty boring and tedious task. Easy to cherry pick pictures, but we all know a game like Collassis and GTA3 are pretty different for a reason, so sticking with a method that compares similar games from similar angles tells the most but is the most time consuming.

 

[Lazy8s]

PS1 to PS2 is not a fitting analogy for Xbox to X360 since the gap between the PlayStations was over a year longer than the Xboxes.

 

[seismologist]

Notice how you had to dig up 5 year old games to prove your point. When you buy new hardware the games should be impressive compared to what's available NOW.

 

[Acert93]

Notice how you had to dig up 5 year old games

I did

to prove your point. When you buy new hardware the games should be impressive compared to what's available NOW.

Did you see the part about why 5 year old games were chosen? Maybe you could suggest a better, less arbitrary and more objective way to evaluate the hardware.

By your comment I get the idea that you do not think the 360 is impressive to what is out on the Xbox. So you think Doom 3 on the Xbox looks as good as a hack port like Quake 4? Or that CoD2 is only marginally better than the console version of CoD? Or to keep a more dev/franchise relative comparison, the Ghost Recon games or Fight Night or PGR3. Games in those categories are nowhere near 5 years in difference but there is a pretty steep difference in quality if you ask my opinion.

But I would be interested in some links to contrasting, or non-constrasting if the case so be, screenshots if you would like to post them.

As a PC gamer with a fairly nice PC I have been pretty impressed with the 360. And I do know playing a FPS like Halo 2 does not even compare to a decent PC shooter--those Xbox games are just plain nasty!

 

[one]

PS1 to PS2 is not a fitting analogy for Xbox to X360 since the gap between the PlayStations was over a year longer than the Xboxes.

Why not? The one who chose to be in that situation is Microsoft itself after all.

 

[Nicked]

I don't disagree with the comparisons you're trying to draw (for reasons pointed out by everyone else), but I do agree with the thrust of your argument.

What public notion? It was a Sony PR smear campaign relating to the Xbox 360 hardware/platform vision.

Smear campaign? Shortest campaign in history.

I suppose your post just proves how incredibly effective one simple comment was.
Or perhaps its a sign that the X360 hasn't in its own right dismissed the notion yet that this comment is now being defended against 3 months after the console launched. GRAW should see to that at the latest.

 

[DuckThor Evil]

I basically have been happy with the X360 launch titles, having great time with games like Condemned, King Kong, Kameo and some others. Acert your comparison was good and I myself hadn't realised how much some PS2 games had evolved through their lifetimes, but there is one thing that makes your comparison look a bit flawed and something that makes X360 look a bit bad and that is Dead or Alive 3. I mean it was a launch game for Xbox and whereas I think that DOA4 is a clear step up from it, it sometimes requires a hard look to spot the difference and many casual gamers don't see that difference. However I'm not a least bit worried about what the future holds for us in games.

 

[pakotlar]

Notice how you had to dig up 5 year old games to prove your point. When you buy new hardware the games should be impressive compared to what's available NOW.

As Acert illuminated, comparing launch titles to 5th gen software is pointless. Compare Knockout Kings 2001 to FNR3 on PS2 and you see an enormous leap in visual fidelity. Xbox has had similar growth to a lesser degree, but was based off established hardware and programming models. If you want an accurate comparison to the previous gen console's 2005/6 software, wait until 2009/10.

Oh, and this "I want I want I want" approach is seriously quixotic.

 

[Acert93]

Smear campaign? Shortest campaign in history.

It was picked up by a lot of press (and certain individuals here); but the main reason I did this now was because I have been away 5 months and I had long held it is best to compare launch titles (or end of gen to end of gen) for the above reasons. Since games are out now it gave me a chance to test my theory and see it in action.

Basically don't read too much into it. I don't feel a need to defend anything (I don't own a room heater... errr Xbox 360), I just thought I would pick up where I left off 5 months ago there was not much software to really do this type of evaluation.

The post was supposed to be tongue in cheek to a degree and intended as a nice comparison of how the industry has advanced in 5 years. But I should have rememberd the fervor the forums fight on their party lines (even though this has nothing to do with any other console!)

In the least I would HOPE that people could appreciate this element of the comparisons (Besides the time it took):

It is impressive to see the degree the industry has advanced in 5 years--especially when there has been significant discussion about diminishing returns in regards to graphics.

I think that is a middleground most could agree on.

 

[Acert93]

I myself hadn't realised how much some PS2 games had evolved through their lifetimes.

Yeah, the jump from 1st gen PS2 games to current PS2 games is jaw dropping. AMAZING.

That would be ANOTHER interesting thread: Comparing 1st gen PS2 titles to last gen PS2 titles. It is amazing what PS2 devs have been able to do over the last 5+ years. The first PS2 games gave us no clue what a treat we were in for.

Hopefully the PS3 and Xbox 360 can give us a similar return on investment--it would be extremely dissappointing if games like GRAW, PGR3, and FNR3 were the best we could expect.

 

[Lazy8s]

People would naturally expect a more noticeable improvement in graphics between PS1 and PS2 than Xbox and X360 because of the PlayStation's longer gap.

 

[one]

What public notion? It was a Sony PR smear campaign relating to the Xbox 360 hardware/platform vision.

Really? Sony may be one of them who share this notion, but I'm not sure P.J. McNealy, an analyst at American Technology Research, and Takashi Oya, analyst at Deutsche Bank, are affiliated with Sony.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showpost.php?p=678082&postcount=86

Why did you bother to create this topic to counter a mere Sony PR smear campaign which you can deny just by pointing out it's a PR? I thought it's because this notion is shared by sizeable amount of people so you felt the necessity.

We can talk about the state of the industry, but that does not tell us much about whether the 360 is the Xbox 1.5 or the Xbox 2, which of course is the point of my thread.

The "Xbox 1.5" is a PR meant for public consumption, and more importantly, it's a subjective feeling which you can't argue against with your own "objectively as possible" but still subjective discourse which can't be validated in a scientific way. It's like arguing against "this food is not delicious enough."

 

[inefficient]

1st gen ps2 game (Knockout Kings 2001)

Current gen ps2 game (Fight Night3 ps2)

To many people, the jump from the 1st gen to the current gen on the ps2 bigger than the jump xbox made from xbox1 to xbox360.

 

[stuart_r]

Here are two screenshots from xbox games look at the difference

http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/016/016698/img_1505436.html

http://media.xbox.ign.com/media/675/675406/img_2461161.html

show's how much games change the same is gonna happen to the xbox 360

 

[fulcizombie]

Notice how you had to dig up 5 year old games to prove your point. When you buy new hardware the games should be impressive compared to what's available NOW.

He compared launch games with launch games,what's so unreasonable about that???I guess that sony ******s like yourself don't want to remember how awfull the launch ps2 games were....

Oh and if we compare UNDOCTORED shots of ps2/xbox games of today(not high-res/AA shots) with xbox360 the difference is similar.

Anyway with games like fight night3 and GRAW coming out there's no point in continuing the xbox1.5 talk.What's more interesting is when the hell we ar going to see all these "amasing" looking ps3 games that will look like killzone and motorsport trailers at last year's E3.

 

[fulcizombie]

1st gen ps2 game (Knockout Kings 2001)

Current gen ps2 game (Fight Night3 ps2)

To many people, the jump from the 1st gen to the current gen on the ps2 bigger than the jump xbox made from xbox1 to xbox360.

Funny how the FN3 ps2 shot is doctored(perfectly AA) while the KK shot isn't.

And please with the jump in ps2 games,when playing even the newest ps2 games on tv the ps2 general problems(horrible texturing,awfull IQ,big aliasing problems) are still very apparent.And who are these "many" people exactly???the only solution for ps2 graphics to be decent is to play these games on a small TV.The bigger the TV the more horrible these "great looking" ps2 games look and if you own a HDTV don't even try the ps2 on it(cause then the games look laughable and hurt your eyes).

 

[weaksauce]

ps2 (this is fight night 2004 actually)

Fight night ps3 demo showed how it's supposed to be next gen.

So what you're saying is that, if 360 was released 5 years ago, it would have been next gen?

Also you could compare the duckies demo showed on ps2 to the lots of ducks demo.